Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

WikiCausal: Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Causal Knowledge Graph Construction

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.00331 v1 pith:C2LFJ3JU submitted 2024-08-31 cs.CL cs.AI

WikiCausal: Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Causal Knowledge Graph Construction

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords causalevaluationcorpusknowledgeconstructionframeworkgraphgraphs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recently, there has been an increasing interest in the construction of general-domain and domain-specific causal knowledge graphs. Such knowledge graphs enable reasoning for causal analysis and event prediction, and so have a range of applications across different domains. While great progress has been made toward automated construction of causal knowledge graphs, the evaluation of such solutions has either focused on low-level tasks (e.g., cause-effect phrase extraction) or on ad hoc evaluation data and small manual evaluations. In this paper, we present a corpus, task, and evaluation framework for causal knowledge graph construction. Our corpus consists of Wikipedia articles for a collection of event-related concepts in Wikidata. The task is to extract causal relations between event concepts from the corpus. The evaluation is performed in part using existing causal relations in Wikidata to measure recall, and in part using Large Language Models to avoid the need for manual or crowd-sourced evaluation. We evaluate a pipeline for causal knowledge graph construction that relies on neural models for question answering and concept linking, and show how the corpus and the evaluation framework allow us to effectively find the right model for each task. The corpus and the evaluation framework are publicly available.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Combining multiple LLMs' reasoning traces into weighted DAGs gives an auditable consensus graph that matches self-consistency and modestly improves on majority voting.